Yes, and that was my point. good observation. and part of the advantage of the vantage is its ability to bolt on hp so easily. aren't we seeing near 375rwhp with the intake, and exhaust /chip mods? that's like 450hp. try and do that with a 3.4liter cayman S,R or whatever.
bottom line, even the racing community doesn't think that the cayman and the Aston vantage are in the same class. these results is for the Aston GT4 by the way, the same one that ran in WC. (or few that was suppored by TRG). the cayman is in a slower class. even the 991 was 2 seconds back. you all know the mods of the GT4. its got a cage, but still the stock running gear of the Vantage v8 4.7. if the vantage was so bad and a "gentlemans road car", it wouldn't be in the front of the pack, now would it.

I figured you looked at something like this..... yes, totally invalid.. even look at laguna for example.. 1:41 for the cayman and 1:52 with the vantage. pretty funny... And, there is a collum for what the car is faster than, and it says, faster than a Z06 but slower than a 348 ferarri. (it also has it faster than a 911 turbo ) do you really think two cars at laguna , one a vantage and the other a cayman would be 10 seconds different? (at near the same hp /weight and the cayman being 400lbs lighter but 5" narrower) of course not. I see that spread with guys driving a MIATA vs a TT Porsche, where the Miata is faster than the TT. The difference is the driver, trust me on this one. in racing, its HP to weight .... its how most of the racing series are set up, and that's for good reason. I know for a fact, the auston can run with any stock Cayman at laguna. you put that driver of the vantage in the cayman and I be he runs 1:55.


so yes, those kind of times are pretty useless. driver, day , tires, etc, all can make HUGE differences in times.


so, yes, the argument is futile. If you know cars, you judge like this:
the same hp to weight will be close at the track. the differences will favor different drivers and different tracks. PERIOD.


the V8 vantage is more of a performance car than a Cayman S. Its also twice the cost. its twice the cost because it is better looking and made better with more expensive bits. And, it will cost more to fix if something goes wrong, but that's not the discussion.
if you want to compare cars that truly are competitive, it would be a race off with a 991 and a vantage, or a vantage S and the 991S. The cayman, as fun as it is to drive, is not the car as the vantage, even the older vantage. Best case they are close to the same, and certainly neither one of them is "hands down" better.


Again, im not trying to argue, just dispel any thought that the vantage isn't a pure bred race car that does everything really well, to the point that a skilled driver will appreciate it. vs any of its contenders, it is right there. 0-60 , 1/4 mile times, and 100-0 tests are just indicators, not the true value of the car being tested, or how competitive it will be , unless that is the test its going to be judged in.

 

I see the problem. you have a known driver like randy pobst, and then some unknown guy posting a time in a vantage. the nice thing for perspective, is that both randy and this "guy" BOTH have a time in the same car, a 911 Carrera. the 911 time for randy was 139. the cayman time you speak of is 1:41. looks like there was a cayman S time of 1:43 by someone else (unnamed), and also a jag F type at 1:43 too. this "guy's" time in the 911, was 1:51 while his vantage time was 1:52. I would be willing to bet, this "guy in the cayman, if he ran it, would be slower than his 911 time, don't you think??? statistics don't lie, people lie with statistics.


anyway, if you look at these times and at least focus on one driver or known drivers and there are a couple here, you can get a feel of what is relevant. however, still many other things to consider... mainly..... tires...


http://fastestlaps.com/tracks/laguna_seca.html

 

This was why I used lap times from a racing series that races basically stock cars, less controversy around the skill of the drivers.

Take a look at this. Here are some ring times. A cayman S (w/ceramic brakes) driven by WALTER ROHRL is one second slower than a 2005 vantage with a unknown driver, 8.03 and 8.04. I also guarantee the vantage didn't have as capable tires.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_N%C3%BCrburgring_Nordschleife_lap_times

 

For each argument for there is an argument against whenever you discuss lap times and performance. If you look at the link I posted it had the 2013 Cayman S do the ring in 7:55 which is significantly faster than the time you mentioned also by Walter Rohrl. http://fastestlaps.com/tracks/nordschleife.html

As I said before, there is no point debating so I'm done. You think the Vantage is faster, I think the new Cayman S is. I'll leave it at that.

 

I did not compromise on driving dynamics when I bought my V8V. First, let me say that I emphatically agree with the notion of how special an event the Aston is. Always. There is truly no comparison in that respect.

Back to dynamics. IMO, it's a case of what you want -- what your preferences are. The Cayman is a superbly engineered and balanced (rear) mid-engined car, and it handles superbly. The V8V is a superbly engineered and balanced front-mid-engined car -- the engine is entirely behind the front axle line, and the weight distribution is slightly rear-biased (49%F / 51%R). It handles like that. Of course, it's heavier than the Cayman, and that is noticeable. Mostly, though, their layouts are different, and they feel like their respective layouts suggest. They're different, but they're both great.

One major difference for me is that, IMO, the Aston is FAR more involving at sane speeds than any current Porsche. One major reason for this is that the Aston still uses hydraulically assisted steering, and the steering feel in a Vantage is truly superb -- among the very best of any car with power steering. As an owner of 911s for 20 years, including the 993 I've owned for 14 years, I'm familiar with good steering feel. The electric steering in a new Cayman or 991 is (sadly) utterly dead in comparison. For me, that matters.

FWIW, in a straight line, a new Cayman S is NOT quicker than a V8V (I'd expect the 981 Cayman S to be quicker around most tracks). If you look at independent magazine tests, they're very close 0-60 if the Cayman S has PDK -- with launch control. That, combined with the heavy rear-wight bias from its mid-mounted engine, means the Cayman launches harder off the line in the test which, for me, is irrelevant. IMO, it's more informative to look at the 0-100 figures and 1/4 mile speeds, since they're less dependent on the launch -- they show that the V8V accelerates more quickly than the Cayman S.

They're very different, but they're both great cars. BTW, I've had my '09 V8V from new, and it's been extremely reliable.

 

yes, there is no point in debating with you , as you bring up information with absolutely no boundaries! you have a time of 7:55 , which is IN NO WAY a stock cayman. common. we know the drivers of Rohl and others, and we already have rohl driving a 911 carrera to a 7:55 on this list and the cayman beats a ferrari 430? and only a second off a porsche GT3? really. if you just use this as your guiding light, you will be lost forever. Ive driven the car. ive raced and instructed for years. its a good car.. its not the vantage, but worst case, they are close to the same. Your "hands down" victory for a cayman leaves me to believe you have not really driven either one to the limit.
Look at that list again. its all over the map. what was done, was to present a point (few of mine and few from others) to help you understand that there is NO sacrafice in performance with a vantage. If you cant drive an aston as fast as a cayman, ill spend the weekend instructing you for free, and pay for the track day!

 

very well said.... easy to follow.... and by the way, the heavier car doesnt always have a disadvantage in handling if it is wider, which the vantage is... by 5".

 

Cheers very thoughtful and helpful post.

 

Reading discussions like this makes me prouder still to own a Vantage. The fact that it has done so well in the racing circuit against Porsche in the past few years is extremely cool since Porsche has always been so dominant. I love hearing commentators during races talking about how certain cars are good but are no match for the mighty Vantage.

 

It also proves that anyone that thinks that the Vantage is below, IN ANY WAY, to the performance to a Cayman, is unable to drive the car, and is NOT "in the know" at all. Again, in my experience, the folks that lack the experience, always are drawn to the lighter, smaller cars. its normal. You feel safer at the edge in one, and it feels faster because its smaller and the vision is better. BUT, it in no way determines what is a better car and which is more capable performance wise. This is seen time and time again, with these stock type cars at the track.
The Vantage is right up there with the top performers of its class, any way you slice it, as long as we are talking the same Hp range. in otherwords, Vantage vs 991, vantage S/GT vs 991S, Vantage S V12 vs GT3. (however, I would lean toward the GT3 if money was on the line because the GT3 is really a race car for the street, and the Vantage V12 is just a vantage with only more power and better brakes.

 

XW, it's great that you can share your extensive circuit experience on this forum. But having that experience won't give you a pass on sweeping generalizations, nor will it make your opinions automatically gospel truth.

LOL: "The folks that lack the experience, always are drawn to the lighter, smaller cars". So by this Commandment, those of us showing up to track days or participating in race series in Lotuses, Miatas, Radicals or any other lighter, smaller car, are all inexperienced. Also: "You feel safer at the edge in one". Well, I felt considerably safer when tracking my V8V than my Exige, as I had more confidence in recovering from loss of adhesion at the limit. But then, I guess that proves your point as I am inexperienced .

 

Its just something is pretty well known. don't confuse, "its easy to feel comfortable for a novice with a lighter , more nimble car" with anyone that shows up in one is a novice. those two points are not TIED together AT ALL! (your algebra logic is a LITTLE OFF! ) As many top racers race these and prefer to race these which doesn't contradict my point. Again, its why we RACE. All cars have something to offer and to match to our individual skill sets. some like open wheelers, other like racing nascar. Im right in between, and take NOTHING from either one.


When you get a lot of time on the track, and you instruct in a lot of different types of cars, the feel of the lighter car is fun, easy and feels very high performance.( folks always say , "my car feels like its on rails"). Nothing to take away from that feeling, but when someone says that their car is BETTER than one another, or will run a faster track time, without really knowing (going by feeling), then, I feel I must comment with what ive seen and experienced before. Some cars feel like they are on rails, just as they get passed by a heavier more powerful car on stickier tires.


My point was not to bash but to fight a gross generalization that a vantage is hands down a lesser performance , "a gentlemans car" vs a exige, cayman, etc, (you pick your lighter more nimble feeling car). but, racing has taught me that most all of these cars can be, equal competitors with something over the other in some situations. Read the old Racing bible book by Carrol. it talks about the physical realities of the trade offs of weight, ride height, HP/torque curves, and set up design. I have NEVER seen real life contradict anything ive read in books designed to educate even the most novice of what it takes to go fast around a race track.


my point here is still and always will be, the vantage is a race car with a leather interior, pure and simple. its a little harsh for the street, vs most all cars ive driven on the street, even the 911s, which makes it a pretty desent performer street or track. its a big (small) sports car vs the 911, cayman and many others, but because of its power, height and width, it makes up for that , which gives it a very solid feel and predictability. Personally, I prefer larger front engine cars , but think the ultimate street car race car package is the GT3 Porsche... unless the budget was unlimited, and then I would pick the R8 V10 or Lambo (they are related by the way,) or ferarri 458GT.


picking times off a website to compare cars is like.....(you pick the lamest analogy you can think of for finding or comparing what is best)


now, what car will feel more safe at the edge or out of control?? I think its generally accepted that a lighter car in most cases is easier to recover from going over the edge. again, that is personal preference. Personally, I feel much safer in a larger car, but think I can recover easier from going over the edge with smaller cars. (warning: admission: gross generalization)

 

https://www.6speedonline.com/forums/...ml#post1925076

and back in 2008, someone asked this exact question. a track guy also, that knew and owned both. sounds like its exactly like i had said. they are all good cars with pros and cons. the pro of the Amv8 is its beauty and its performance combined!

enjoy!

 

[QUOTE=baege;4114258]I would pick the Aston if I had a daily driver. The Cayman if I didn't. People confuse road cars and track cars too much. A road car has so many other reasons for owning it beyond the numbers.

I loved the two Porsches I owned, but I Lust after my Aston's. They are fantastic things to own and drive, even if other cars are faster.

The one thing I do love about an Aston is the attention to the human experience. They care about the stuff a stop watch doesn't see. They reward all your senses in a very visceral way. The touch, site, smell, sound, all of it. For the road that really matters.

No one can do the performance numbers you read about on the street anyway. Its all academic. On the street the Aston was actually more rewarding than my R8, precisely because it was more old school and perhaps a little less polished. I could feel the menace just under the skin. The Audi was so accomplished it hid all the scary stuff, until it got really scary.

That said I do miss my Cayman R.

 

[QUOTE=black penguin;4118364]Well said.
The Aston seduces you in some way.